Re: [julia-users] is @inline redundant with fn(a::Int) = do_something(a) ?
got it On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 12:38 PM, Stefan Karpinski wrote: > If that's all there is to a definition it's pretty likely to get inlined, > but you can write arbitrarily complex expressions, so it's not quite the > same. I really don't think we should make using one-liner vs longer > function form significant in terms of performance. That would encourage > people writing awkwardly long one-liners for all the wrong reasons. > > On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 1:01 AM, Jeffrey Sarnoff < > jeffrey.sarn...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Is there a reason to add @inline to functions that are defined using the >> form fn(x) = do_fn(x), or is it redundant in v0.4? >> > >
Re: [julia-users] is @inline redundant with fn(a::Int) = do_something(a) ?
If that's all there is to a definition it's pretty likely to get inlined, but you can write arbitrarily complex expressions, so it's not quite the same. I really don't think we should make using one-liner vs longer function form significant in terms of performance. That would encourage people writing awkwardly long one-liners for all the wrong reasons. On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 1:01 AM, Jeffrey Sarnoff wrote: > Is there a reason to add @inline to functions that are defined using the > form fn(x) = do_fn(x), or is it redundant in v0.4? >
[julia-users] is @inline redundant with fn(a::Int) = do_something(a) ?
Is there a reason to add @inline to functions that are defined using the form fn(x) = do_fn(x), or is it redundant in v0.4?
